After the Boston series this team needed something, I called it a little more piss and vinegar.

3 season later and after the Sedins the skill drops significantly. There is no magic fix and at the same time the hockey Gods really have it in for the Nucks.

but I see a light at the end of the tunnel.

With the Sedins here for another 4 seasons I would really like to give BoHo and another prospect or 2 a chance to play on the team next season with meaningful minutes. There is a small chance this team as it is currently constructed would go far in the playoffs this season or next. trading picks/prospect for rentals has not worked so develop the young guys and this team will be back up there in a couple of seasons.

I also believe this team could afford to send 1 of the top 4 D guys to get some additional help, there is about a billion different trade opportunities so I wont name any just that if there was one to be made I think they should do it.

RoyalDude wrote:Who says I'm enjoying it. Not sure what's to like about Gillis inability to maintain a level of elite hockey respectability with his hockey team. The Blackhawks and Bruins facet fallen from grace the way we have

So if the team is playing well its because Nonis and Burke provided all the core players. If the team is playing poorly it is Mike Gillis's fault because he added the supplementary pieces to the roster . Do I have this right RoyalSlug ? Who drives the bus here ? Is it the core who were acquired by the genius managers in Burke and Nonis ? Or is the reason the team is in a slump because Santorelli and Stanton and Kassian have played poorly ?

RoyalDude wrote:Who says I'm enjoying it. Not sure what's to like about Gillis inability to maintain a level of elite hockey respectability with his hockey team. The Blackhawks and Bruins facet fallen from grace the way we have

So if the team is playing well its because Nonis and Burke provided all the core players. If the team is playing poorly it is Mike Gillis's fault because he added the supplementary pieces to the roster . Do I have this right RoyalSlug ? Who drives the bus here ? Is it the core who were acquired by the genius managers in Burke and Nonis ? Or is the reason the team is in a slump because Santorelli and Stanton and Kassian have played poorly ?

The more I mop the floor with your hairy ass the more boring it gets.

Fuck this guys a good poster, pat yourself on the back, Art.

"I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Are you listening? - Plastics." - The Graduate

It's funny. Outside of our game in LA, and two games at the start of this season against San Jose, the Canucks haven't really been blown out by anyone. Even in that LA game, the Canucks hammered Quick with scoring chances and if Quick hadn't made some brilliant saves, things could have gotten out of hand in our favor. All of our games have been close...........and dare I say, up until our most recent home stand, we were actually dominating the mass majority of the games against these elite teams.

Even against Chicago and LA these past two games, we had those teams on the ropes.

San Jose last year playoffs = same thing. Yeah......Sharks won 4-0, but that series could have just as easily been 2-2 since we were leading two of those games with less than 5 minutes left to play in the 3rd.

Against LA the year before in the playoffs - again........that series could have been 3-2 in our favor. We outplayed the Kings in the last 3 games of that series.

I guess the point I'm trying to make here is that maybe we're not that far off. Are we elite right now? No. Are we all that far off?.................I think that's extremely debatable.

What is the old saying? 1 degree of separation? I think that old adage is definitely applicable here.

EDIT - I'll say one more thing: I agree with John Tortorella that I like this team's work ethic and compete level. They are doing a lot of right things out there. People compare this team to the 2005/2006 team, but I see them being closer to the 2006/2007 team in terms of their tenacity. Elite teams are beating us, but they aren't dominating us. It's that close.

It's funny. Outside of our game in LA, and two games at the start of this season against San Jose, the Canucks haven't really been blown out by anyone. Even in that LA game, the Canucks hammered Quick with scoring chances and if Quick hadn't made some brilliant saves, things could have gotten out of hand in our favor. All of our games have been close...........and dare I say, up until our most recent home stand, we were actually dominating the mass majority of the games against these elite teams.

Even against Chicago and LA these past two games, we had those teams on the ropes.

San Jose last year playoffs = same thing. Yeah......Sharks won 4-0, but that series could have just as easily been 2-2 since we were leading two of those games with less than 5 minutes left to play in the 3rd.

Against LA the year before in the playoffs - again........that series could have been 3-2 in our favor. We outplayed the Kings in the last 3 games of that series.

I guess the point I'm trying to make here is that maybe we're not that far off. Are we elite right now? No. Are we all that far off?.................I think that's extremely debatable.

What is the old saying? 1 degree of separation? I think that old adage is definitely applicable here.

EDIT - I'll say one more thing: I agree with John Tortorella that I like this team's work ethic and compete level. They are doing a lot of right things out there. People compare this team to the 2005/2006 team, but I see them being closer to the 2006/2007 team in terms of their tenacity. Elite teams are beating us, but they aren't dominating us. It's that close.

Yup. I'd say we're one or two players away from being a serious contender, whether that'd be by trade, free agency or some of the young'uns stepping up and reaching a new level Kassian? I'm looking at you!

Per wrote:Yup. I'd say we're one or two players away from being a serious contender, whether that'd be by trade, free agency or some of the young'uns stepping up and reaching a new level Kassian? I'm looking at you!

And given where we are in the standings, and what our record has been over the past 10 games, it seems so laughable to even be thinking along those lines........on the surface.

But again - I think we're seeing A lot of good habits/things from this team, and in all/most of our losses to elite teams this year, we have out-played them for the most part.

I almost compare this situation to the Oilers in 2006 when they got Dwayne Roloson, and the San Jose Sharks in 2005 when they acquired Joe Thornton. In both cases, both teams were substantially better than their records would indicate, but just needed that one "piece."

If Evander Kane is available, I think Gillis should make anyone and everyone available to the Jets that is not named Henrik, Daniel, Kesler, Horvat, Shinkaruk, or any of our Top 4 defensemen.

If Hansen, Kassian, Tanev, and a draft pick can land us Kane, I'd do it.

Per wrote:Yup. I'd say we're one or two players away from being a serious contender, whether that'd be by trade, free agency or some of the young'uns stepping up and reaching a new level Kassian? I'm looking at you!

...

If Evander Kane is available, I think Gillis should make anyone and everyone available to the Jets that is not named Henrik, Daniel, Kesler, Horvat, Shinkaruk, or any of our Top 4 defensemen.

If Hansen, Kassian, Tanev, and a draft pick can land us Kane, I'd do it.

How many of our top 4 defensemen have had a minor late game stroke that has cost us the game in recent history? I think we can part with one of them as we have 5.....Tanev is playing top 4 minutes, and doing a decent job of it.

One of our top 4 could potentially get a team talking about a top 6 forward. If not a straight up one for one, then at least as the centerpiece. We have some forwards that could be shopped for a defender. Booth is more attractive to some teams than people like to think, particularly teams in the east.....he's fast, goes hard to the net, not shy of the corners, and has a good shot.....but Booth just doesn't fit in here and needs a fresh start. If he's going to be a total bust, well he's only got one year remaining after this one, not a terrible risk for a team to take when the cap is projected to climb. You could package Booth up with some youth or a pick in exchange for a 3-4 guy on the blueline.

Meds wrote:How many of our top 4 defensemen have had a minor late game stroke that has cost us the game in recent history? I think we can part with one of them as we have 5.....Tanev is playing top 4 minutes, and doing a decent job of it.

Good point Meds, but the Canucks have also been fairly lucky this year as far as limited injuries to the blue-line are concerned. From the playoffs in both 2009 and 2011, we of all teams should know how much injuries on defense can really destroy a team.

Defense is the one position where a team needs great depth and an insurance policy.

Tanev and Stanton have been great for us, but the last thing we want is to over-extend them into roles that they may not be suited for on a consistent basis. (i.e. the equivalent situation of Santorelli and Richardson up front).

Personally - I think there are other ways to make improvements to our Top 6 rather than giving up a Top 4 defenseman.

We have good strength and depth on defense. Why take away from it? If anything, why not add to it so that we have something that could be considered the best in the league? (or Top 3 in the league).

Meds wrote:How many of our top 4 defensemen have had a minor late game stroke that has cost us the game in recent history? I think we can part with one of them as we have 5.....Tanev is playing top 4 minutes, and doing a decent job of it.

Good point Meds, but the Canucks have also been fairly lucky this year as far as limited injuries to the blue-line are concerned. From the playoffs in both 2009 and 2011, we of all teams should know how much injuries on defense can really destroy a team.

...

We have good strength and depth on defense. Why take away from it? If anything, why not add to it so that we have something that could be considered the best in the league? (or Top 3 in the league).

Food for thought.

That's why I generally say that moving one of them should only happen in the event that one of our forwards can be moved to supplement the loss of Edler, Hamhuis, Bieksa, or Garrison.

I think Gillis has a better chance of finding a trading partner moving defense for offense and vice-versa, unless he's found someone who is just swapping same for same in hopes that a fresh start works for both parties. It's not rocket science, if a team needs offense they aren't going to part with a top six forward unless they are getting a top six in return, likewise for defense.

I definitely don't think we should deplete the team , and in a trade that gets a legitimate top six, we would need to move a guy like Booth out as the roster would start to really pile up with too many "top six" forwards. Again, why I have advocated moving both a forward (Booth in a package) for a defenseman, and one of our top 4 (Edler usually) for a top six forward.